Yahoo Answers is shutting down on May 4th, 2021 (Eastern Time) and beginning April 20th, 2021 (Eastern Time) the Yahoo Answers website will be in read-only mode. There will be no changes to other Yahoo properties or services, or your Yahoo account. You can find more information about the Yahoo Answers shutdown and how to download your data on this help page.
Trending News
If Fiornia defeats Boxer in California, will funding for "green energy" dry up in California?
The Boxer/Fiornia senate race is regarded as a dead heat by most polls, if Fiorna defeats Boxer, which is a very real possibility, since the incumbent, Boxer, has not achieved 50 % by the 1st of September, in the polls, will the federal money many 'green energy' companies are depending on still be available, or will those funds be more difficult to obtain? The state of California requires that a certain percentage of electrical power be from non-carbon fuel sources, however the current technology for wind, solar, and other forms of "green energy production" are problematic, highly dependent upon federal grants, and is in need of further research and development to obtain better cost to yield economics. So if Fiornia defeats Boxer will this stop much of that research and development money?
D1981: Good points, but Fiornia reportedly has a personal fortune far in excess of what Boxer has, and may be willing to spend in excess of Boxer, so your contention that Boxer has an advantage due to campaign funds may not be correct. Additionally there is significant voter dissatisfaction among voters of all backgrounds regarding incumbents. It is my belief tht most of the new funds available for Green energy research and development will come from the federal government, not the state of California, which is essentially bankrupt, or near it at this time. Certainly the gubernatorial race is important, but who ever wins will face the problems of dealing with the current fiscal problems, new or even continued funding of green projects may be a thing of the past, unless new federal monies in large amounts can be obtained, right?
California environmental regulations add in the neighborhood of 12% to the cost of many manufacturing companies, this according to an interview CNN did on a CFO of a microchip manufacturer, as opposed to certain other states. So it appears there may be substance to your assertion.
last post was for David, sorry.
F: I have heard your allegations regarding Fiornia and her experience at HP, do you have any documentation to demonstrate your statements?
D1981: I understand what you are saying, so you are saying that federal monies are not that important in California, as most of the capitol for green energy comes from private investors? Thanks for the information, I was ignorant of that fact. I always thought the major source of R and D money for green energy products was the federal government.
Phoenix: I understand that the senate race is a federal office elected by the voters of a state, California, however, do you agree with Dana that most of the money for Green research comes from private companies, or does the federal government through loans and grants, provide most of the money for green energy research?
8 Answers
- Phoenix QuillLv 71 decade agoFavorite Answer
The Fionia / Boxer race is Federal not State.
So this could have an effect on FEDERAL green job spending...
But it doesn't really affect STATE spending.
Of course BOTH are broke, so the real question is will voter anger toss enough Democrats to stop the borrowing that funds consultants like Dana.
Wouldn't it be nice if 'Green' Companies were actually self sustaining businesses, instead of welfare stations for AGW alarmists?
The phrase "highly dependent upon federal grants, and in need of further research and development to obtain better cost to yield economics"....
... is code for "Giant non profit money pit"
.
- Red E3Lv 61 decade ago
As many point out it is a Senate seat
I say it might get better. See Feinstens crushing of a solar project in a link below.
Business is business green red and yellow and blue or any other color or non color. Typically republicans are more business friendly so it might get better and not worse.
I think Fiorina has a good chance. California has precedence for having elected a republican during tough economic times. See Pete Wilson 1982 defeating Jerry Brown for the open senate seat.
- roderick_youngLv 71 decade ago
If you are saying that Fiorina would be less competent at attracting Federal funding to California, I would tend to agree.
- Dana1981Lv 71 decade ago
No. You're asking about the wrong race - the governor has much more impact on green investment in the state than the senators. And in fact I'd say Whitman has a significantly better chance of winning than Fiorina.
Boxer shouldn't have a problem. She's got over $11 million cash on hand vs. Fiorina's under $1 million. The state is strongly blue, and Fiorina had to shift to the right to win her primary election. Boxer has barely even started to campaign yet - once she does, I predict she'll widen that lead once again. As it stands now, she already has nearly a 60% chance of winning re-election.
http://elections.nytimes.com/2010/senate/californi...
Whitman on the other hand has nearly limitless funds from her own fortune to spend on her campaign. I live in California, and hardly a day has gone by over the past several months when I haven't seen a Whitman ad. In fact I rarely see ads from any politician other than Whitman. She's trying to buy the election. Then again, I'm sick to death of seeing her ads, so it could over-saturate the voters and backfire.
Like Fiorina, she shifted to the right to win the primary, and supported Arizona's immigration law, which will piss off a lot of Latinos in the state. I'm sure Jerry Brown will nail her on that when he throws his campaign into gear. But right now they're in a dead heat.
http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2010/gover...
And the governor has much more say in what the state does than the senators. Whitman supports delaying the state's climate bill, whereas Brown supports continuing to implement it. Most Californians agree with Brown's position, so that may help him win the election as well. But if Whitman manages to win, she'll have much more say in the state's 'green energy' funding, and it will certainly be less than if Brown is elected. Which is a major concern, because the 'green tech' sector has been the fastest growing in California.
http://sacramento.bizjournals.com/sacramento/stori...
*edit* Sorry I wasn't clear. The green technology investment in the state comes from private businesses. Those private businesses come to the state because of incentives set up by the state government. For example, they might want to take advantage of the statewide carbon cap and trade system, unless Whitman is elected and manages to delay its implementation. Or as another example, many solar companies have set up shop here because the state (and many cities) provide solar panel rebates, so this is a good place to create a solar company.
Federal government has very little say in which states green investment goes into.
- How do you think about the answers? You can sign in to vote the answer.
- DavidLv 41 decade ago
A Fiorina win will slow down Obama's jihad against American businesses... But it won't alter California's anti-business regulatory follies.
- F. PerduraboLv 71 decade ago
Since Fiorina is a crook that ran HP into the ground it will be interesting to see who her cronies are and who gets her special "funding."
- Anonymous1 decade ago
Boxer is a racist and should be defeated .
Source(s): C-Span CNN
